Forum:Nitrome Wiki Content Licensing (Amendment)
Summary of Motion: I propose to change the terms of use of the content of our wiki, to prohibit the use of our articles for commercial profit. At about Halloween last year, NOBODY wrote User blog:NOBODY/For look how it splits the horizon 'twain... Nitrome Wiki books on amazon. In this blog post, NOBODY exposed how Nitrome Wiki articles were bound into books and sold for profit, with no compensation whatsoever to the contributors here. I suppose that business venture didn't take off too well =D (skip the next two paragraphs to below the line if you are short on time) I am not so certain whether they broke the law and whether we have the right to demand compensation (although we won't bother). If you squint at the bottom-right corner of each wiki page, you would see these words. Content is available under CC-BY-SA. This means that our wiki is currently under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike License. This means that anyone can make use of and distribute the content of our wiki and make any derivatives(this means making an altered version of our work), as long as they credit us for their work. In the example NOBODY posted (please see the image in his blog post), the word Nitrome is included in the title. It is questionable if that is a valid way to credit us(they can argue they made the effort). However, making the content into a book to sell for commercial profit is permitted. ---- I am of the view that everyone here who contributes their time and effort to the encyclopaedia selflessly, with no conditions attached, do so to better the encyclopaedia for the benefit of all Nitromians. To publish our work into a book and to charge others for a work that is freely available is plain disrespectful. Now, what I want to suggest is to switch our wiki from the CC-BY-SA over to the CC-BY-NC, which prohibits use of our hard work for commercial purposes. The NC at the end means non-commercial, the only difference from the CC-BY-SA license. Sure, others can still continue to rip-off our content, because we don't monitor offenders and issue DMCA notices. However, this switch shows the strong opposition of the Wiki team against ripping-off for profit, and our pride in our work. Sincerely, SQhi•'''(talk)Wiki Planner 16:49, July 5, 2013 (UTC) -- 16:36, July 5, 2013 (UTC) Sounds good. -- 19:21, July 5, 2013 (UTC) If we do really have the authority to change our license, I support it. 20:28, July 5, 2013 (UTC) :I feel we do. At www.wikia.com/Licensing Wikia lists three different content licenses Wikia wikis fall under. Plus, we have community agreement to change the license here. We may have to use Special:Contact for this. SQhi•'(talk)Wiki Planner 05:57, July 6, 2013 (UTC) I can't find any reason why we wouldn't want to do this. 23:34, July 5, 2013 (UTC) with the understanding that using content from our wiki is not the same as "ripping". After all, Nitrome Wiki is modeled after bits of ideas and codes from other wikis. No one should ever be charged for content we distribute and allow others to distribute freely. 05:35, July 6, 2013 (UTC) :Hi Random, nope by ripping off I mean using our IP for their own profit. We have no qualms against readers saving a copy of our work, and distributing it is fine just as long as they simply credit us. The wiki goes by the principle of share-alike after all. SQhi'•'(talk)Wiki Planner 05:57, July 6, 2013 (UTC) Looks like we have the agreement of the most active members of our wiki. I'll let NOBODY know about this so he can send the message. And nope, NOBODY, you don't have to write the message all by yourself, I'll be happy to help out =] SQhi'•'(talk)Wiki Planner 05:57, July 6, 2013 (UTC) :Oh yeah, and you might want to link the license you're referring to: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/3.0/, just to make sure we know what we're dealing with. 06:02, July 6, 2013 (UTC) ::We have to send a message? I thought we only had to change some Mediawiki page that showed that all content is licensed on CC-BY-SA. -- 13:20, July 6, 2013 (UTC) :::I'm not sure of the procedure to change it, but at least it is known that Wikia wikis use one of three types of licenses. Maybe it can be changed by MediaWiki page, but I do not know of any. Should we ask around at the community central? SQhi'•'(talk)Wiki Planner 14:35, July 6, 2013 (UTC) Hi participants. I had a look at this page (w:Help:Licensing) and under the section alternate licenses, is it written ''The vast majority of communities on Wikia use the CC-BY-SA, although there are a few with other Creative Commons licenses. These were '''generally' communities acquired by Wikia whose CC-BY-NC noncommercial license were kept intact.'' Hmm, does that mean that some wikis got an alternate license by another mean? Yet also, there is also this next line. Wikia does not change the license of a community on request. I still think it is worth a try though, especially when we have strong community support plus it is not just a request from an admin. SQhi•'''(talk)Wiki Planner 15:04, July 6, 2013 (UTC) :I'm assuming some Wikis got different licensing because they were merged into Wikia. See this section of the Wikipedia article for Wikia. -- 15:41, July 6, 2013 (UTC) ::I don't know how difficult it would be to just add a "non-commercial" tag to our wiki. SQhi•'(talk)Wiki Planner 15:45, July 6, 2013 (UTC) :::It's actually quite easy, I just change every occurrence of "CC-BY-SA" to what we want. -- 16:03, July 6, 2013 (UTC) '''Request for closure' - 15:47, July 10, 2013 (UTC) No. - First, no, Wikia does not change the wiki license to whatever the pink unicorn in your head said it wants it to be. Second, the whole caeking point of a WIKI is people sharing their information FOR FREE AND WITHOUT OWNERSHIP OF IT. Yes, putting your stuff in a book is kinda plagiarism. No, you're not allowed to stop someone doing it because you do not own the information that you're trying to protect for some strange reason. The only thing that you can complain about is if the said plagiariser claims credit for the work. If this was such a serious issue that needed "fixing" as badly as you suggest, and if it could be "fixed", don't you think Wikia, who aren't idiots, by the way, would have or are doing something about it right now? I don't deny that fact, but this is their concern, so if they do choose to pursue this, leave it to them. 20:58, July 27, 2013 (UTC) :Do other wikis use a non-commercial CC license? What about wikis that host fanon works? 22:10, August 13, 2013 (UTC) ::Request for closure (as it seems as though Wikia will just reject our plea, based off what Bluefire2 says). -- 01:48, November 8, 2013 (UTC) :::I agree, Bluefire makes a good point. By editing this wiki, we are essentially placing our work in the public domain, for anyone to use. -- 03:59, November 8, 2013 (UTC) :::*Ahem* So I assume, 3 months later, that we are still not going with this since Bluefire seemed to have scared everyone out of it? 15:55, February 10, 2014 (UTC) Could you please stop talking on old topics? This is not permitted and you don't get it. You should've said that a year ago. 16:03, February 10, 2014 (UTC) :He's right. 02:10, February 16, 2014 (UTC)